CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-03868 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 19-03868

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date8/11/2022
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Rhett E. Petcher
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 30-year-old plan production control specialist employed by a defense contractor since January 2019. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline F, financial considerations, due to the applicant's significant outstanding debts, including defaults on a car loan, federal student loans, and a credit card. The SOR indicated that the applicant's financial issues raised doubts about her reliability and trustworthiness.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to defaulting on her student loans and credit card debts but denied owing on certain automobile loans, claiming they were resolved through insurance. She provided no documentation to support her claims of debt resolution and acknowledged that she had not made payments on her debts for an extended period. The administrative judge found that the applicant's financial situation was concerning, noting her lack of progress in addressing her debts and her failure to provide evidence of any efforts to resolve them.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance eligibility. The judge concluded that the applicant's financial delinquencies and lack of proactive measures to address her debts were inconsistent with the national interest, thereby justifying the denial of her clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · For Applicant
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-03868

deniedAug 11, 2022· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old plan production control specialist was denied a security clearance under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, due to significant and unresolved financial delinquencies. The Statement of Reasons detailed several outstanding debts, including $31,370 in federal student loans in collection, a $334 charged-off auto loan, and a $297 charged-off credit card debt. Additionally, the applicant admitted to a $130 medical debt and owed $112 for cellular phone services in collection.

The decision highlighted that the applicant had defaulted on multiple debts, demonstrating poor self-control and a lack of judgment. While Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 19(a) and AG ¶ 19(c) were raised, Mitigating Conditions AG ¶ 20(c) and AG ¶ 20(d) were applied.

Ultimately, the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of debt resolution or overall financial stability. The judge concluded that these ongoing financial issues raised concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of her security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant defaulted on multiple debts, including a car loan, federal student loans, and credit card debt.
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of debt resolution or financial stability.
The applicant's financial delinquencies indicated poor self-control and lack of judgment.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Delinquencies

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(c)rejectedThe Individual Has Received or Is Receiving Financial CounselingThe applicant has not had financial counseling.
AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant has not established payment plans for her debts.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 4, 2022
Answer filedMar 6, 2022
Hearing heldJun 28, 2022via video conference
Decision dateAug 11, 2022

Cite For

Financial Delinquencies as Indicators of Poor Judgment Under Guideline F
The Necessity of Demonstrating a Plan for Debt Repayment
The Importance of Financial Stability in Security Clearance Evaluations

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found multiple financial concerns under Guideline F, including defaults on a car loan, federal student loans, and credit card debts. While the applicant admitted to owing a medical debt, the judge ultimately ruled against the applicant on the majority of the financial allegations, leading to a denial of clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant defaulted on a car loan, her federal student loans, and a small credit-card debt. $297	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant owed $31,370 in federal student-loan debts in collection. $31,370	Against Applicant	Student Loan Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.l	Applicant owed $334 in charged-off auto loan. $334	Against Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Unknown	—	—	—
1.m	Applicant owed $297 in charged-off credit-card debt. $297	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	—	—
1.o	Applicant admitted owing the $130 medical debt. $130	For Applicant	Medical Debt	Admitted	—	—	Claimed Debt Paid in Full
1.p	Applicant owed $112 in cellular-phone debt in collection. $112	Against Applicant	Utility or Phone Debt	Unknown	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.